Abstract
Lahiri sampling - which has not so far been used in auditing - and sieve sampling - which is relatively new - are compared with unrestricted random, systematic and cell sampling of monetary units, which have been in use for some time. Comparisons are carried out using the Stringer, cell and moment bounds by means of a simulation study based on two actual accounting populations with a realistic range of error rates and amounts. The results show that substantial gains in the precision of the bounds occur with systematic, cell and sieve sampling relative to both unrestricted random and Lahiri sampling in populations with large line items; the resultant decrease in the sample size is illustrated by the design effect. Reliability and tightness of the bounds are unaffected by the method of selection. Relative advantages of the schemes are discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
